KA Vs 426 Hemi

[Edub1]

Deleted due to pecker woods.
Modified by Edub1 at 5:57 PM 12/20/2006

[neverlift]

from pure tech. standpoint YES we own that ***. But from powerto weight ratio,they own us. IIRC hemi stock trim could put down a nasty 13 second 1/4. I dont know many stock or stockish ka's that have that ability with full stripping. I mean sliders can get a 9 in the 1/4 with bolt ons but thats him. suspension/economy we own too,braking.

Straight line they kill us two turns and we can beat them. stopping lets be serious.

[pregmantis]

that hemi will own us all day long. thereare other engines that have better hp/liter than our ka...but yeah that elephant motor will smash us. BUT can you imagine if you were to square deck the block? kiss the hemi goodbye!
Modified by pregmantis at 5:30 AM 12/10/2006

[neverlift]

WERD square decking ftmfw

[niemczykj]

some of the vtech motors make around 100hp per liter

[drftsilvia]

some of the vtech motors make around 100hp per liter

vtech yes....Valve Timing Electronic Control Hotness. I'd think with all the VTEC stickers on every honda..everywhere that people would know there is no H. oh and stock sr20det makes 100hp per liter, yay.

[Bigvinnie]

some of the vtech motors make around 100hp per liter

But then again Vtech engines don't make a substantial amount of TORQUE...

[Fenvy]

The end result is that the stock KA motor has about the same per liter power as the legendary 426 Hemi. Next time you run into some "muscle cars rule" guy see what he thinks of that.

are you serious? that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

[Edub1]

Again, pecker woods.
Modified by Edub1 at 5:57 PM 12/20/2006

[Fenvy]

are you hoping to say that ka is better simply because hp per liter is higher?

There are plenty of NA motors that has hp per liter higher than KA.

jdm b16a 168hp = 105b18c1 184hp = 102.2b18c5 195hp = 108.3b18c7 210hp = 116.7

ka24de 155hp = 64.6 = the lulz of hp per hp

clearly this is not the best way to measure a motor.

Show me a stock NA motor that's 5.0 or more with 100+ liter per hp... I don't think it exist. Heavier moving parts is a burden in big motors.
Modified by Loveless at 12:11 PM 12/11/2006

[Edub1]

Did I mention pecker woods?
Modified by Edub1 at 5:58 PM 12/20/2006

[InsanityInc]

But then again Vtech engines don't make a substantial amount of TORQUE...

And neither of you can spell VTec correctly.

The KA has a better hp/l than the hemi, because the SAE net horsepower of the hemi was like 300 or so. However, hp/l means nothing (except level of engineering). If it meant anything performance-wise, then every car would have a motorcycle engine.

[nousablenames133]

Why is it dumb? Inch for inch our KA puts out as much or more power. Sure they have 7L to our 2.4L, but that's when you hit the boost and say what up now biotch!

Seriously, my friend showed me a 9 second Hemi Cuda strip car like it was the shiite and I showed him a 9 second 240sx KA-T street car.

I really want to see that "street" 240sx. 9 seconds means you're making 700hp and while you theoretically could street drive 700hp you couldn't take advantage of the power. There's more to going fast than just the engine. Keep in mind that 9 second Cuda is probably still NA. Forced induction increases power dramatically. There is a reason pro drag racers use V8's.

for the record "VTEC" is Variable Valve Timing and Lift Electronic Controltell Honda that's more than 4 words

[dark_munchkin]

Ivan at AMS. 9.2 Second 718rwhp KA-T. Has plates on it and he drives it to work everyonce in awhile.

[sunnys14]

VTEC - variable valve timing with electronic lift control. they just shortened the whole thing to VTEC

[Edub1]

Yep.
Modified by Edub1 at 5:59 PM 12/20/2006

[Fenvy]

Apple, meet your arch-nemesis - orange!

Don’t talk about MPG because Honda B series are very fuel efficient. See fueleconomy.gov - In between 1998 240sx and 1998 integra, b18s are more fuel efficient. Comparing MPG to old v8 is pretty stupid because it was never designed to have fuel efficiency in mind.

You do not compare v8 to inline 4, you just can't. It’s no different from comparing a bike engine to an automotive engine.

The only fair way to compare is similar motors, 4 cylinders to 4 cylinders. And we have already established that many engines of similar weight, size, cylinder #, is more fuel and power efficient than the KA24DE. There you have it, KA24DE is NOTHING special. No, this is not engine loyalty talking, I don’t think my SR20DET is anything special either. It is just like any other engine.

I don’t know what your point is, what you’re arguing about or what exactly you’re trying to prove. I think you think too highly of KA

[neverlift]

oohhh I got one

My rc car has a .15 engine and is a 1/10 scale car right. It goes about 50mph in real time. If its 1/10 the size and goes 50(realtime)mph is it going 500mph in 1/10 land? Also said engine revs past 20000 rpm

lol I hate my ka but love it too

[Edub1]

Modified by Edub1 at 6:00 PM 12/20/2006

[Edub1]

Modified by Edub1 at 6:01 PM 12/20/2006

[Ajax]

So what was the point of this thread then?Wow the 15 year old engine in my car has similar power to liter figures as a 30 year old engine. Man that'll make those muscle car guys flinch...

[Edub1]

Modified by Edub1 at 6:02 PM 12/20/2006

[neverlift]

you did so now you get

[Fenvy]

You proved no point, B18C5, KA24DE proved no points. You are still comparing apple and orange.

I hinted in a previous post that bigger engine can not go faster due to weight. We know that light is mass less and the speed of light is attainable because it is weightless. Likewise, it is not possible to have something with mass traveling at the speed of light according to Einstein. Mass is a major factor here, greater mass equals greater burden, which is why stepping down from V12, HEMI, inline 4, bike motor to fuel powered RC car motors, the horsepower per liter goes in an opposite upward slopping curve.

This is the same reason why most of us can't jump our own heright while grasshopper jumps 20 times its height (or length). If we can reduce our mass to the quantity of a grasshopper without dimishing the energy output capacity of our legs, I am pretty sure we can jump over twin towers.

If an engine produced 100hp to the crank while the other produced 200hp at the crank, does it mean the latter is twice as fast? No, then how much faster is it? Perhaps horsepower per liter should be dismissed altogether on this subject. What if used “energy per mass unit”?

Does that open your eyes now?

[pregmantis]

loveless, doesnt light gt sucked into a black hole because it has mass? just a thought.

edub, your talking about a motor that was designed about 50yrs ago technology has definitely changed, the hemi is a legend and its well deserved. The absolute king of the strip is STILL A HEMI!!

400hp out of any sedan/truck is allways imopressive , just more impressive wit a small motor. dont get me wrong, I love the ka and I accept its strong pionts and bad....but to me the hemi deserves to be the king and our ka's dont deserve anythng. I dont think it matters what forum you go on, you would prob get the same responses as you have here.

btw, I like ALL makes of engines except honda...heh but honda motors are kick ***.

1more thing. if your cruising wit your car and your rear tires(24inch) are spinning at 1000rpm and your at say 65mph?, do you think that a dumptruck with an 11foot tire spinning at 1000rpm would be doing 65mph? I dont think so. those #rs are not real but the concept is, so i think you wr9ong on the RC subject.

[Fenvy]

loveless, doesnt light gt sucked into a black hole because it has mass? just a thought.

whoa don't challenge my high school level science, okay?

as far as I know. light is a mass-less energy, blackhole's immense gravity field pulls that energy toward itself.

There is a lot that we don't know about black hole, if there is actually another side and if there is, how do any mass survive the gravity field that pulls the eletron field apart

[pregmantis]

I actually have less than high school science knowlege. hehe

[neverlift]

wait I was correct? I was just going for a laugh?

[Fenvy]

no idea but let's all point at Edub1 and laugh

[Edub1]

Like I said, I regret having brought it up. You guys can think what you want.

As far as the other stuff is concerned, Einstein argued that light actually has characteristics of both waves and matter and that it does have a super tiny amount of mass. Supposedly a black hole's gravity is so strong that it pulls in light.

As for the RC car, are you joking? Why do you think putting electric motors in cars has been such a challenge? force = mass * acceleration when there is no friction, wind resistance or other opposing forces like rolling tire resistance. In reality, increasing the mass of a vehicle causes dissperportionate resistance to acceleration. So, as the mass of an RC car increases say 500 times, engine power would need to increase by many times that figure, say 2000 times. In reality, scaling up your RC car would probably give you something that would hardly crawl if it moved at all.

This is why crotch rockets are so increadably fast with about 185HP. It's all about the power to weight ratio.

But this has nothing to do with the original topic. There is nothing about a smaller motor that makes it intrinsically more performance oriented. The simple fact is that technology has improved and today's motors are superior, as in my original case in point.

The Hemi was a great motor in it's day but by today's standards it can't compair. Even some of the hot rod guys are putting the newer motors in their old classics. But think what you want. I'm done arguing about it.